최신버전ACD301유효한공부완벽한시험덤프

Fast2test는 IT인증자격증을 취득하려는 IT업계 인사들의 검증으로 크나큰 인지도를 가지게 되었습니다. 믿고 애용해주신 분들께 감사의 인사를 드립니다. Appian ACD301덤프도 다른 과목 덤프자료처럼 적중율 좋고 통과율이 장난이 아닙니다. 덤프를 구매하시면 퍼펙트한 구매후 서비스까지 제공해드려 고객님이 보유한 덤프가 항상 시장에서 가장 최신버전임을 약속해드립니다. Appian ACD301덤프만 구매하신다면 자격증 취득이 쉬워져 고객님의 밝은 미래를 예약한것과 같습니다.

IT업계에 종사하고 계신 분은Appian ACD301 시험을 패스하여 자격증을 취득하려고 검색하다 저희 블로그를 보게 되시고 저희 사이트까지 방문하게 될것입니다. 방문하는 순간 Appian ACD301시험에 대한 두려움이 사라질것입니다. 완벽한 구매후 서비스까지 겸비하고 있어 자격증을 취득하는데서의 믿음직스러운 동반자로 되어드릴게요.

>> ACD301유효한 공부 <<

ACD301시험 - ACD301높은 통과율 시험대비 덤프공부

우리Fast2test에는 아주 엘리트 한 전문가들로 구성된 팀입니다 그들은 끈임 없는 연구와 자기자신만의 지식으로 많은 IT관연 덤프자료를 만들어 냄으로 여러분의 꿈을 이루어드립니다, 기존의 시험문제와 답과 시험문제분석 등입니다. Fast2test에서 제공하는Appian ACD301시험자료의 문제와 답은 실제시험의 문제와 답과 아주 비슷합니다. Fast2test덤프들은 모두 보장하는 덤프들이며 여러분은 과감히 Fast2test의 덤프를 장바구니에 넣으세요. Fast2test에서 여러분의 꿈을 이루어 드립니다.

최신 Lead Developer ACD301 무료샘플문제 (Q16-Q21):

질문 # 16
Your Agile Scrum project requires you to manage two teams, with three developers per team. Both teams are to work on the same application in parallel. How should the work be divided between the teams, avoiding issues caused by cross-dependency?

A. Group epics and stories by technical difficulty, and allocate one team the more challenging stories.
B. Allocate stories to each team based on the cumulative years of experience of the team members.
C. Group epics and stories by feature, and allocate work between each team by feature.
D. Have each team choose the stories they would like to work on based on personal preference.

정답：C

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:
In an Agile Scrum environment with two teams working on the same application in parallel, effective work division is critical to avoid cross-dependency, which can lead to delays, conflicts, and inefficiencies. Appian's Agile Development Best Practices emphasize team autonomy and minimizing dependencies to ensure smooth progress.
Option B (Group epics and stories by feature, and allocate work between each team by feature):
This is the recommended approach. By dividing the application's functionality into distinct features (e.g., Team 1 handles customer management, Team 2 handles campaign tracking), each team can work independently on a specific domain. This reduces cross-dependency because teams are not reliant on each other's deliverables within a sprint. Appian's guidance on multi-team projects suggests feature-based partitioning as a best practice, allowing teams to own their backlog items, design, and testing without frequent coordination. For example, Team 1 can develop and test customer-related interfaces while Team 2 works on campaign processes, merging their work during integration phases.
Option A (Group epics and stories by technical difficulty, and allocate one team the more challenging stories):
This creates an imbalance, potentially overloading one team and underutilizing the other, which can lead to morale issues and uneven progress. It also doesn't address cross-dependency, as challenging stories might still require input from both teams (e.g., shared data models), increasing coordination needs.
Option C (Allocate stories to each team based on the cumulative years of experience of the team members):
Experience-based allocation ignores the project's functional structure and can result in mismatched skills for specific features. It also risks dependencies if experienced team members are needed across teams, complicating parallel work.
Option D (Have each team choose the stories they would like to work on based on personal preference):
This lacks structure and could lead to overlap, duplication, or neglect of critical features. It increases the risk of cross-dependency as teams might select interdependent stories without coordination, undermining parallel development.
Feature-based division aligns with Scrum principles of self-organization and minimizes dependencies, making it the most effective strategy for this scenario.

질문 # 17
As part of an upcoming release of an application, a new nullable field is added to a table that contains customer data. The new field is used by a report in the upcoming release and is calculated using data from another table.
Which two actions should you consider when creating the script to add the new field?

A. Add a view that joins the customer data to the data used in calculation.
B. Create a rollback script that clears the data from the field.
C. Create a script that adds the field and then populates it.
D. Create a rollback script that removes the field.
E. Create a script that adds the field and leaves it null.

정답：C,D

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:As an Appian Lead Developer, adding a new nullable field to a database table for an upcoming release requires careful planning to ensure data integrity, report functionality, and rollback capability. The field is used in a report and calculated from another table, so the script must handle both deployment and potential reversibility. Let's evaluate each option:
* A. Create a script that adds the field and leaves it null:Adding a nullable field and leaving it null is technically feasible (e.g., using ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN in SQL), but it doesn't address the report's need for calculated data. Since the field is used in a report and calculated from another table, leaving it null risks incomplete or incorrect reporting until populated, delaying functionality. Appian's data management best practices recommend populating data during deployment for immediate usability, making this insufficient as a standalone action.
* B. Create a rollback script that removes the field:This is a critical action. In Appian, database changes (e.g., adding a field) must be reversible in case of deployment failure or rollback needs (e.g., during testing or PROD issues). A rollback script that removes the field (e.g., ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN) ensures the database can return to its original state, minimizing risk. Appian's deployment guidelines emphasize rollback scripts for schema changes, making this essential for safe releases.
* C. Create a script that adds the field and then populates it:This is also essential. Since the field is nullable, calculated from another table, and used in a report, populating it during deployment ensures immediate functionality. The script can use SQL(e.g., UPDATE table SET new_field = (SELECT calculated_value FROM other_table WHERE condition)) to populate data, aligning with Appian's data fabric principles for maintaining data consistency. Appian's documentation recommends populating new fields during deployment for reporting accuracy, making this a key action.
* D. Create a rollback script that clears the data from the field:Clearing data (e.g., UPDATE table SET new_field = NULL) is less effective than removing the field entirely. If the deployment fails, the field's existence with null values could confuse reports or processes, requiring additional cleanup. Appian's rollback strategies favor reverting schema changes completely (removing the field) rather than leaving it with nulls, making this less reliable and unnecessary compared to B.
* E. Add a view that joins the customer data to the data used in calculation:Creating a view (e.g., CREATE VIEW customer_report AS SELECT ... FROM customer_table JOIN other_table ON ...) is useful for reporting but isn't a prerequisite for adding the field. The scenario focuses on the field addition and population, not reporting structure. While a view could optimize queries, it's a secondary step, not a primary action for the script itself. Appian's data modeling best practices suggest views as post-deployment optimizations, not script requirements.
Conclusion: The two actions to consider are B (create a rollback script that removes the field) and C (create a script that adds the field and then populates it). These ensure the field is added with data for immediate report usability and provide a safe rollback option, aligning with Appian's deployment and data management standards for schema changes.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Database Schema Changes" (Adding Fields and Rollback Scripts).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Data Management Module (Schema Deployment Strategies).
* Appian Best Practices: "Managing Data Changes in Production" (Populating and Rolling Back Fields).

질문 # 18
You need to design a complex Appian integration to call a RESTful API. The RESTful API will be used to update a case in a customer's legacy system.
What are three prerequisites for designing the integration?

A. Understand the different error codes managed by the API and the process of error handling in Appian.
B. Understand the content of the expected body, including each field type and their limits.
C. Define the HTTP method that the integration will use.
D. Understand whether this integration will be used in an interface or in a process model.
E. Understand the business rules to be applied to ensure the business logic of the data.

정답：A,B,C

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:As an Appian Lead Developer, designing a complex integration to a RESTful API for updating a case in a legacy system requires a structured approach to ensure reliability, performance, and alignment with business needs. The integration involves sending a JSON payload (implied by the context) and handling responses, so the focus is on technical and functional prerequisites. Let' s evaluate each option:
* A. Define the HTTP method that the integration will use:This is a primary prerequisite. RESTful APIs use HTTP methods (e.g., POST, PUT, GET) to define the operation-here, updating a case likely requires PUT or POST. Appian's Connected System and Integration objects require specifying the method to configure the HTTP request correctly. Understanding the API's method ensures the integration aligns with its design, making this essential for design. Appian's documentation emphasizes choosing the correct HTTP method as a foundational step.
* B. Understand the content of the expected body, including each field type and their limits:This is also critical. The JSON payload for updating a case includes fields (e.g., text, dates, numbers), and the API expects a specific structure with field types (e.g., string, integer) and limits (e.g., max length, size constraints). In Appian, the Integration object requires a dictionary or CDT to construct the body, and mismatches (e.g., wrong types, exceeding limits) cause errors (e.g., 400 Bad Request). Appian's best practices mandate understanding the API schema to ensure data compatibility, making this a key prerequisite.
* C. Understand whether this integration will be used in an interface or in a process model:While knowing the context (interface vs. process model) is useful for design (e.g., synchronous vs.
asynchronous calls), it's not a prerequisite for the integration itself-it's a usage consideration. Appian supports integrations in both contexts, and the integration's design (e.g., HTTP method, body) remains the same. This is secondary to technical API details, so it's not among the top three prerequisites.
* D. Understand the different error codes managed by the API and the process of error handling in Appian:This is essential. RESTful APIs return HTTP status codes (e.g., 200 OK, 400 Bad Request, 500 Internal Server Error), and the customer's API likely documents these for failure scenarios (e.g., invalid data, server issues). Appian's Integration objects can handle errors via error mappings or process models, and understanding these codes ensures robust error handling (e.g., retry logic, user notifications). Appian's documentation stresses error handling as a core design element for reliable integrations, making this a primary prerequisite.
* E. Understand the business rules to be applied to ensure the business logic of the data:While business rules (e.g., validating case data before sending) are important for the overall application, they aren't a prerequisite for designing the integration itself-they're part of the application logic (e.g., process model or interface). The integration focuses on technical interaction with the API, not business validation, which can be handled separately in Appian. This is a secondary concern, not a core design requirement for the integration.
Conclusion: The three prerequisites are A (define the HTTP method), B (understand the body content and limits), and D (understand error codes and handling). These ensure the integration is technically sound, compatible with the API, and resilient to errors-critical for a complex RESTful API integration in Appian.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Designing REST Integrations" (HTTP Methods, Request Body, Error Handling).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Integration Module (Prerequisites for Complex Integrations).
* Appian Best Practices: "Building Reliable API Integrations" (Payload and Error Management).
To design a complex Appian integration to call a RESTful API, you need to have some prerequisites, such as:
* Define the HTTP method that the integration will use. The HTTP method is the action that the integration will perform on the API, such as GET, POST, PUT, PATCH, or DELETE. The HTTP method determines how the data will be sent and received by the API, and what kind of response will be expected.
* Understand the content of the expected body, including each field type and their limits. The body is the data that the integration will send to the API, or receive from the API, depending on the HTTP method.
The body can be in different formats, such as JSON, XML, or form data. You need to understand how to structure the body according to the API specification, and what kind of data types and values are allowed for each field.
* Understand the different error codes managed by the API and the process of error handling in Appian.
The error codes are the status codes that indicate whether the API request was successful or not, and what kind of problem occurred if not. The error codes can range from 200 (OK) to 500 (Internal Server Error), and each code has a different meaning and implication. You need to understand how to handle different error codes in Appian, and how to display meaningful messages to the user or log them for debugging purposes.
The other two options are not prerequisites for designing the integration, but rather considerations for implementing it.
* Understand whether this integration will be used in an interface or in a process model. This is not a prerequisite, but rather a decision that you need to make based on your application requirements and design. You can use an integration either in an interface or in a process model, depending on where you need to call the API and how you want to handle the response. For example, if you need to update a case in real-time based on user input, you may want to use an integration in an interface. If you need to update a case periodically based on a schedule or an event, you may want to use an integration in a process model.
* Understand the business rules to be applied to ensure the business logic of the data. This is not a prerequisite, but rather a part of your application logic that you need to implement after designing the integration. You need to apply business rules to validate, transform, or enrich the data that you send or receive from the API, according to your business requirements and logic. For example, you may need to check if the case status is valid before updating it in the legacy system,or you may need to add some additional information to the case data before displaying it in Appian.

질문 # 19
You are reviewing log files that can be accessed in Appian to monitor and troubleshoot platform-based issues.
For each type of log file, match the corresponding Information that it provides. Each description will either be used once, or not at all.
Note: To change your responses, you may deselect your response by clicking the blank space at the top of the selection list.

정답：

설명：

Explanation:
* design_errors.csv # Errors in start forms, task forms, record lists, enabled environments
* devops_infrastructure.csv # Metrics such as the total time spent evaluating a plug-in function
* login-audit.csv # Inbound requests using HTTP basic authentication
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:Appian provides various log files to monitor and troubleshoot platform issues, accessible through the Administration Console or exported as CSV files. These logs capture different aspects of system performance, security, and user interactions. The Appian Monitoring and Troubleshooting Guide details the purpose of each log file, enabling accurate matching.
* design_errors.csv # Errors in start forms, task forms, record lists, enabled environments:The design_errors.csv log file is specifically designed to track errors related to the design and runtime behavior of Appian objects such as start forms, task forms, and record lists. It alsoincludes information about issues in enabled environments, making it the appropriate match. This log helps developers identify and resolve UI or configuration errors, aligning with its purpose of capturing design-time and runtime issues.
* devops_infrastructure.csv # Metrics such as the total time spent evaluating a plug-in function:The devops_infrastructure.csv log file provides infrastructure and performance metrics for Appian Cloud instances. It includes data on system performance, such as the time spent evaluating plug-in functions, which is critical for optimizing custom integrations. This matches the description, as it focuses on operational metrics rather than errors or security events, consistent with Appian's infrastructure monitoring approach.
* login-audit.csv # Inbound requests using HTTP basic authentication:The login-audit.csv log file tracks user authentication and login activities, including details about inbound requests using HTTP basic authentication. This log is used to monitor security events, such as successful and failed login attempts, making it the best fit for this description. Appian's security logging emphasizes audit trails for authentication, aligning with this use case.
Unused Description:
* Number of enabled environments:This description is not matched to any log file. While it could theoretically relate to system configuration logs, none of the listed files (design_errors.csv, devops_infrastructure.csv, login-audit.csv) are specifically designed to report the number of enabled environments. This might be tracked in a separate administrative report or configuration log not listed here.
Matching Rationale:
* Each description is either used once or not at all, as specified. The matches are based on Appian's documented log file purposes: design_errors.csv for design-related errors, devops_infrastructure.csv for performance metrics, and login-audit.csv for authentication details.
* The unused description suggests the question allows for some descriptions to remain unmatched, reflecting real-world variability in log file content.
References:Appian Documentation - Monitoring and Troubleshooting Guide, Appian Administration Console - Log File Reference, Appian Lead Developer Training - Platform Diagnostics.

질문 # 20
You are running an inspection as part of the first deployment process from TEST to PROD. You receive a notice that one of your objects will not deploy because it is dependent on an object from an application owned by a separate team.
What should be your next step?

A. Push a functionally viable package to PROD without the dependencies, and plan the rest of the deployment accordingly with the other team's constraints.
B. Check the dependencies of the necessary object. Deploy to PROD if there are few dependencies and it is low risk.
C. Halt the production deployment and contact the other team for guidance on promoting the object to PROD.
D. Create your own object with the same code base, replace the dependent object in the application, and deploy to PROD.

정답：C

설명：
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:As an Appian Lead Developer, managing a deployment from TEST to PROD requires careful handling of dependencies, especially when objects from another team's application are involved. The scenario describes a dependency issue during deployment, signaling a need for collaboration and governance. Let's evaluate each option:
* A. Create your own object with the same code base, replace the dependent object in the application, and deploy to PROD:This approach involves duplicating the object, which introduces redundancy, maintenance risks, and potential version control issues. It violates Appian's governance principles, as objects should be owned and managed by their respective teams to ensure consistency and avoid conflicts. Appian's deployment best practices discourage duplicating objects unless absolutely necessary, making this an unsustainable and risky solution.
* B. Halt the production deployment and contact the other team for guidance on promoting the object to PROD:This is the correct step. When an object from another application (owned by a separate team) is a dependency, Appian's deployment process requires coordination to ensure both applications' objects are deployed in sync. Halting the deployment prevents partial deployments that could break functionality, and contacting the other team aligns with Appian's collaboration and governance guidelines. The other team can provide the necessary object version, adjust their deployment timeline, or resolve the dependency, ensuring a stable PROD environment.
* C. Check the dependencies of the necessary object. Deploy to PROD if there are few dependencies and it is low risk:This approach risks deploying an incomplete or unstable application if the dependency isn' t fully resolved. Even with "few dependencies" and "low risk," deploying without the other team's object could lead to runtime errors or broken functionality in PROD. Appian's documentation emphasizes thorough dependency management during deployment, requiring all objects (including those from other applications) to be promoted together, making this risky and not recommended.
* D. Push a functionally viable package to PROD without the dependencies, and plan the rest of the deployment accordingly with the other team's constraints:Deploying without dependencies creates an incomplete solution, potentially leaving the application non-functional or unstable in PROD. Appian's deployment process ensures all dependencies are included to maintain application integrity, and partial deployments are discouraged unless explicitly planned (e.g., phased rollouts). This option delays resolution and increases risk, contradicting Appian's best practices for Production stability.
Conclusion: Halting the production deployment and contacting the other team for guidance (B) is the next step. It ensures proper collaboration, aligns with Appian's governance model, and prevents deployment errors, providing a safe and effective resolution.
References:
* Appian Documentation: "Deployment Best Practices" (Managing Dependencies Across Applications).
* Appian Lead Developer Certification: Application Management Module (Cross-Team Collaboration).
* Appian Best Practices: "Handling Production Deployments" (Dependency Resolution).

질문 # 21
......

요즘 같은 인재가 많아지는 사회에도 많은 업계에서는 아직도 관련인재가 부족하다고 합니다.it업계에서도 이러한 상황입니다.Appian ACD301시험은 it인증을 받을 수 있는 좋은 시험입니다. 그리고Fast2test는Appian ACD301덤프를 제공하는 사이트입니다.

ACD301시험: https://kr.fast2test.com/ACD301-premium-file.html

Appian인증ACD301시험준비중이신 분들은Fast2test 에서 출시한Appian인증ACD301 덤프를 선택하세요, Fast2test에서는 무료로 24시간 온라인상담이 있으며, Fast2test의 덤프로Appian ACD301시험을 패스하지 못한다면 우리는 덤프전액환불을 약속 드립니다, Appian ACD301유효한 공부 덤프는 pdf파일과 온라인서비스로 되어있는데 pdf버전은 출력가능하고 온라인버전은 휴대폰에서도 작동가능합니다, Appian ACD301유효한 공부 만일 고객이 우리 제품을 구입하고 첫 번째 시도에서 성공을 하지 못 한다면 모든 정보를 확인 한 후에 구매 금액 전체를 환불 할 것 입니다, Appian ACD301유효한 공부 경쟁이 이와같이 치열한 환경속에서 누구도 대체할수 없는 자기만의 자리를 찾으려면 IT인증자격증취득은 무조건 해야 하는것이 아닌가 싶습니다.

리안의 비밀은 때가 되면 알려주겠지요, 건물, 집, 차, Appian인증ACD301시험준비중이신 분들은Fast2test 에서 출시한Appian인증ACD301 덤프를 선택하세요, Fast2test에서는 무료로 24시간 온라인상담이 있으며, Fast2test의 덤프로Appian ACD301시험을 패스하지 못한다면 우리는 덤프전액환불을 약속 드립니다.

ACD301유효한 공부 최신 인증시험

덤프는 pdf파일과 온라인서비스로 되어있는데 pdf버전은 출력가능하고 온라인버전은ACD301최신버전 덤프샘플 다운휴대폰에서도 작동가능합니다, 만일 고객이 우리 제품을 구입하고 첫 번째 시도에서 성공을 하지 못 한다면 모든 정보를 확인 한 후에 구매 금액 전체를 환불 할 것 입니다.

경쟁이 이와같이 치열한 환경속에서 누구도 대체ACD301할수 없는 자기만의 자리를 찾으려면 IT인증자격증취득은 무조건 해야 하는것이 아닌가 싶습니다.